Assessment and Learning that Values the ‘Golden Goose’

Assessment and Learning that Values the ‘Golden Goose’

Cutting across these key players are action points in which all have roles to play to carry forward the challenge of assessing and learning that strengthens social change. Many questions are still on the table calling for more precise insights, nitty-gritty dilemmas remain to be thrashed out, and thus practical hands-on work needs to be undertaken. The principles outlined in this document need to be fleshed out for different organisational set-ups, capacity levels and social change processes. For all those involved – activists, intermediaries, evaluators, donors – generating practical ideas and sharing inspiring examples is essential. This means investing in:

Concrete efforts to systematise and review the respective benefits and limitations of different grounded case studies that have enabled critically reflective learning and assessment.

Training efforts for social change organisations around the idea of how to assess social change, based on existing stock of experiences and approaches plus recognition of core non-negotiable principles and purposes.

Peer support opportunities for those in social change organisations to ask and receive ideas for addressing dilemmas and challenges on assessment and learning processes.

Seeding experimentation with particular combinations of approaches and methods with detailed documentation of the processes.

A new model of assessment and learning is needed that places developmental social change at the heart, rather than myopically focusing on the interim steps. SPARC refers to development as ‘the golden goose’ (Patel 2007) and urges a model of assessment and learning that places the goose at the centre, rather than its golden eggs. Assessing and learning about development as a process of social change means charting the ‘golden eggs’ that can be discerned, in the form of processes that multiply and serve increasing numbers, building capacities and provoking shifts of thinking in government as well as among the poor. However, by valuing only the eggs, the goose is in danger of serious neglect. Sheela Patel cautions: “With few insights about how to understand it and measure its level of maturity and sustainability, external assessment processes are too rigid to understand these dynamics. Sadly, the goose is often killed due to lack of understanding”. A model of assessment and learning that builds on the reflections in this document would be more effective at strengthening social change that tackles the persisting injustices about which all of and everyone in development should, in theory, be concerned.

Annex 2. References

ASC. 2005. Second Round of Discussions on Theme 1 - ‘Understanding Social Change’.Assessing Social Change E-discussion, April 2005.

ASC. 2006. Summary of Discussions on Theme 3 - Understanding and dealing with different actors in the assessment processes (ourselves and funding agencies). Assessing Social Change E-discussion, May 2006.

Gaventa, J. 2005. Reflections on the Uses of the ‘Power Cube’ Approach for Analyzing the Spaces, Places and Dynamics of Civil Society Participation and Engagement. CFP evaluation series 2003-2006: no 4. MBN Secretariat, The Hague. http://www.partos.nl/uploaded_files/13-CSP-Gaventa-paper.pdf

Guijt, I. 2007. Critical Readings on Assessing and Learning for Social Change. A Review. Institute of Development Studies (UK) and Learning by Design (Netherlands). http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/Part/proj/socialchange.html

Mott, A. 2003. Strengthening Social Change Through Assessment and Organizational Learning. Report on The Gray Rocks Conference - An International Exchange with Grant Support from The Ford Foundation. September 2003. Community Learning Project, Washington DC. http://www.communitylearningproject.org/docs/Gray%20Rocks%20Conference%20Report.pdf

Mwasuru, M. 2007. Assessing Social Change Through Participatory Action Research: The Case of Kasighau Small-Scale Miners. Case study produced for the ‘Assessing Social Change’ initiative. http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/Part/proj/socialchange.html.

Patel, S. 2007. Reflections on Innovation, Assessment and Social Change. A SPARC case study. Case study produced for the ‘Assessing Social Change’ initiative. http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/Part/proj/socialchange.html

Reeler, D. 2007. A Theory of Social Change and Implications for Practice, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation. Community Development Resource Association, Cape Town, South Africa.

Reilly, M. 2007. An Agenda for Change n the USA: Insights from a Conversation about Assessing Social Change in Washington, DC. Case study produced for the ‘Assessing Social Change’ initiative. http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/Part/proj/socialchange.html

Samba, E. 2007. Sauti Ya Wanawake. The Role of Reflection in Women’s Social Change Work. Case study produced for the ‘Assessing Social Change’ initiative. http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/Part/proj/socialchange.html

3 An emergent property becomes apparent when several simple entities or processes operate in an environment but form more complex behaviours as a collective. Certain properties emerge that the entities/processes do not have themselves.

4 See http://www.kenyalink.org/sucam/

5 This section is largely based on a note written by C. Clark, V. Miller. S. Musyoki and L. VeneKlasen ‘Theme 2 Part One: Methods, Tools and Processes for Assessing Social Change’ to kick start the second thematic discussion of the ASC group.

6 http://www.iied.org/NR/agbioliv/pla_notes/index.html

7 http://www.actionaid.org.uk/323/reflect.html

8 ‘Complex’ is not the same as ‘complicated’. A complex system has many elements that can interact with each other and their environment. Complex systems display a level of organization without any external organizing principle being applied. Part of the system may be altered and the system may still be able to function. In complicated systems, parts have to work in unison to accomplish a function. A key defect in a critical part brings the entire system to a halt.